Top 5 test allrounders of the last 30 years.

[srbhkshk]

I reckon you'd make my top 5 of posters I agreed most with about historical cricketers, but this is nuts.

Dravid was not a better allrounder than de Grandhomme. He totally was a better cricketer though.

I think the argument is to have a binary classification for who is an all-rounder vs who is not but if the guy does make it into the all-rounder list then it's just about who was the better player.

 

[ankitj]

I reckon you'd make my top 5 of posters I agreed most with about historical cricketers, but this is nuts.

Dravid was not a better allrounder than de Grandhomme. He totally was a better cricketer though.

lol. I basically look at a pool of cricketers that qualify as all-rounders. Then go ahead with ranking them as cricketers. Dravid will fail to qualify in the list of all-rounders.

Edit: or what @srbhkshk said

 

[Prince EWS]

lol. I basically look at a pool of cricketers that qualify as all-rounders. Then go ahead with ranking them as cricketers.

Right but the fact that you had to answer with this should show you that it's ****ing bonkers, right?

 

[vicleggie]

Pollock
Cairns
Flintoff
Jadeja

 

[_00_deathscar]

Stokes
Jadeja
Shakib

Anyone not including these 3 are nuts

That last one becomes real tough

 

[ankitj]

Sticking my neck out to say Stokes is being overrated here.

 

[Burgey]

Raza

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Raza

Batting average of 36, but bowling av of 42. Would definitely have picked him over Mitchell Santner for NZ though.

 

[Shady Slim]

Right but the fact that you had to answer with this should show you that it's ****ing bonkers, right?

nah ankitj is right though, as soon as you classify ashwin as an allrounder, if you are rating allrounders and he's the better cricketer he's the better cricketer on account of being better than the other guy

the debate is better had at the threshold question of whether ashwin is an allrounder, because if you let him in he's in

 

[honestbharani]

Sticking my neck out to say Stokes is being overrated here.

Nah... one of the few players whose impact is greater than their numbers show. Guy always turns up in a crisis in all disciplines.

 

[ankitj]

Just noticed Ashwin has scored a hundred and taken a fiver in same test 3 times. Botham has done it 5 times. No one else has done it more than twice. I am reconsidering my vote.

 

[Xix2565]

Just a basic look at the outputs of Jadeja, SPollock and Ashwin per Test/Innings in both disciplines.

BATTING	Matches played	Innings batted	Runs made	Balls faced	Dismissals	Batting Average	Strike Rate	Runs per Test	Runs per Innings	100s made	50s made
Ravindra Jadeja	60​	89​	2523​	4240​	69​	36.57​	59.50​	42.05​	28.35​	3​	17​
Shaun Pollock	108​	156​	3781​	7198​	117​	32.32​	52.53​	35.01​	24.24​	2​	16​
Ravichandran Ashwin	86​	123​	2931​	5364​	109​	26.89​	54.64​	34.08​	23.83​	5​	12​

BOWLING	Matches played	Innings bowled	Runs conceded	Balls bowled	Wickets taken	Bowling Average	Strike Rate	Wickets per Test	Wickets per Innings	10 wickets in a match	5 wickets in an innings
Ravindra Jadeja	60​	114​	5980​	14751​	242​	24.71​	60.95​	4.03​	2.12​	1​	10​
Shaun Pollock	108​	202​	9733​	24353​	421​	23.12​	57.85​	3.90​	2.08​	1​	16​
Ravichandran Ashwin	86​	162​	10666​	23089​	442​	24.13​	52.24​	5.14​	2.73​	7​	30​

Ashwin doesn't seem too far off either of them to be considered not an all-rounder.

Cough cough